Previous Comments

Laurie David has now written a childrens book on AGW?
Gaia have mercy!

After making millions selling her film AIT, isn’t it time Ms. David (and Al Gore) started walking the environmental walk instead of just using the issue as an opportunity to line their pockets with millions more dollars??

I sure won’t take any environmental “lessons” from those two. Regards,

Kevin, taking environmental lessons from Al Gore is like a polygamist telling me I should practise monogamy.

Not only is the message important, the messenger delivering the message is important. And the AGW-profiteering and highly consumptive lifestyles of both Laurie David and Al Gore diminishes the value of their exhortations for the public to change.

You appear to be a sado-masochistic personality type (I am using the term technically: I don’t mean you like leather and butt plugs–per se). You seem to be believe that there must be leaders, you like authority, hence the implicit need for that people bearing messages have god-like qualities and embody entirely the message they are converying. The medium IS the message. Just like Bush is. Damn, isn’t he wonderful? I bet you dream of him. Maybe he touches you in special ways…

Perhaps by bringing in the ‘fact’ that Al Gore not only makes millions from his global warming lectures, but he uses the money to buy a new mansion every month; that he travels between in his private 747, and (because he removed the roof of off all of them) which he heats by burning live babies. Live babies, soaked in CRUDEOIL! (smell, SMELL, that hypocrisy! Shame on you Al. Shame. On. You!).

I propose that the Denialist contingent should actually be fostered and encouraged in their woolly minded delusions.

That way we can use Bertrand Russel rolling in his grave as an alternate power source.

Paul’s email falls under the typical “if they’re so good, why are they making so much money?” complaint that’s often leveled at people like Al Gore, Laurie David, Michael Moore, etc.

It’s an old-school mentality.

To people like Paul, there’s an established system: You can either be wealthy OR you can have principles. People who believe this become uncomfortable when they learn about men and women who buck the convention – it forces them to re-evaluate the choices they’ve made in their own lives.

Making money while doing good is capitalism’s highest ideal. We can all help to reduce the dissonance that people like Paul experience if we loudly celebrate ethical wealth whenever it occurs.

That the science of climate change has nothing to do with Al Gore - he is not a scientist, he’s a communicator, and the state of climate science today would be no different if Mr. Gore had never undertaken his efforts with The Inconvenient Truth.

There is no need to base your opinions on what Al Gore says to understand the current state of climate science. Pick up a copy of Science or check out the websites of some of the respected scientific organizations, like the UK’s Royal Society (Sir Isaac Netwon was once the President). These are great sources of up-to-date climate science and represent what the experts in the field are saying about climate change.

Democracy is utterly dependent upon an electorate that is accurately informed. In promoting climate change denial (and often denying their responsibility for doing so) industry has done more than endanger the environment. It has undermined democracy.

There is a vast difference between putting forth a point of view, honestly held, and intentionally sowing the seeds of confusion. Free speech does not include the right to deceive. Deception is not a point of view. And the right to disagree does not include a right to intentionally subvert the public awareness.